Leadmac Property & Development Limited & Anor V.chevron Nigeria Close Pfa Limited (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal is against the dismissal of the Appellant’s motion dated 13th of March 2012 for interlocutory injunction against the Respondent pending the determination of the Suit No. LD/2027/2011. The Appellants had instituted the Suit against the Respondent vide a writ of summons taken out of the Registry of the Lagos State High Court on the 11th day of November, 2011 with claims as follows:-

“1. A declaration that the contract for the sale of land identified and delineated as C1-B, C1-C, (COMMERCIAL PLOTS) AND R2-B (RESIDENTIAL PLOTS) as contained in the initial offer of 27th July, 2010 is still subsisting.

2. An order of Specific performance of the terms of contract for the sale of land identified and delineated as C1-B, C1-C (COMMERCIAL PLOTS) AND R2 (RESIDENTIAL PLOTS) in the Twin Lakes estate Master Plan.
3. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants either by itself, its privies, agents or any representative from reselling and/or reassigning the land identified and delineated as C1-B, C1-C (COMMERCIAL PLOTS) AND R2-B

1

(RESIDENTIAL PLOTS) to another party.”

The reliefs sought by the Appellants in the aforenamed motion were:-

“1. AN ORDER of Interlocutory Injunction restraining the Defendants whether by Themselves, privies, agents or any representative howsoever from reselling, offering to sell or otherwise dealing with the land identified and delineated as C1-B, C1-C (Commercial plots) and R2-B (Residential Plots) situate at Twin Lakes Estate, Lekki Peninsula, Lekki, Lagos in a manner inconsistent with the interest of the claimants in the said plots of land pending the determination of this suit.

2. AN ORDER directing the Defendants/Respondents to restore the original beacons on the allotted plots and clearly delineated same accordingly pending the determination of this suit.
3. AN ORDER of interlocutory injunction pending the determination of this suit, restraining the Defendants whether by themselves, privies, officers, agents or howsoever from altering the layout survey plan of the Estate or otherwise carrying out any re-delineation thereon in such a manner inconsistent with the original identification and determination of the plots of land

2

allocated to the Claimants prior to the institution of this suit.

4. AN ORDER granting the Claimants/Applicants leave to post a sign on the plots of land the subject matter in this suit.
5. AND For such orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of this case.

The Respondent opposed the motion and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and consideration of the affidavit evidence before it, the High Court refused and dismissed the motion on the 8th day of May, 2012.

There are three (3) grounds of dissatisfaction with the dismissal of the motion contained on the Appellants’ Notice of Appeal dated the 21st but filed on the 22nd of May, 2012.

In the Appellants’ brief, settled by Mr. Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, filed on the 3rd of January, 2013 two (2) issues were distilled for decision in the appeal as follows:-

“(1) Whether the Court below came to a right finding in concluding that balance of convenience was not in favour of the Appellants?

(Grounds 1 & 2).